Change My View (CMV):

For people who have an opinion on something but accept that they may be wrong or want help changing their view.

Submission Rules

(A)Try to explain the reasoning behind your view, not just what that view is (500+charactersrequired). [More]

(B)You must personally hold the view and be open to it changing. A post cannot be neutral, on behalf of others, playing devil's advocate, or "soapboxing". Posts by throwaway accounts must be approved through modmail. [More]

(C)Submission titles must adequately sum up your view and include "CMV:" at the beginning. Posts with misleading/overly-simplistic titles may be removed. [More]

(D)Meta posts are to be submitted to /r/ideasforcmv. Feasible suggestions that gain traction there may be implemented or posted to CMV for further discussion by the mods. [More]

(E)Only post if you are willing to have a conversation with those who reply to you, and are available to do sowithin3 hours after posting. If you haven't replied during this time, your post will be removed. [More]

Comment Rules

Direct responses to a CMV post must challenge at least one aspect of OP’s stated view (however minor), unless they are asking a clarifying question. Arguments in favor of the view OP is willing to change must be restricted to replies to other comments. [More]

Don't be rude or hostile to other users. Your comment will be removed even if the rest of it is solid. 'They started it' is not an excuse. You should report it, not respond to it. [More]

Refrain from accusing OP or anyone else of being unwilling to change their view. If you are unsure whether someone is genuine, ask clarifying questions (see: socratic method). If you think they are still exhibiting ill behaviour, please message us. [More]

If you have acknowledged/hinted that your view has changed in some way, please award a delta. You must also include an explanation of this change along with the delta. [More]

No low effort comments. Comments that are only jokes or "written upvotes", for example. Humor and affirmations of agreement can be contained within more substantial comments. [More]

/u/DeltaBot will deal with scores, wiki pages and leaderboards, more info on which can be found here.

Please message the mods if you suspect misuse/abuse of the delta.

Wiki of CMV

We have a fairly extensive wiki that stores lots of useful information, such as full explanations of our rules and guidelines, archives (e.g. popular topics), and some general information about the subreddit.

I'm am a classical/modern liberal in political philosophy, so as a liberal I hate what the NSA is doing. I don't think Snowden deserves jail time. I think the fact that this is happening is wrong.

But I have seen redditors predict that this is the first step into the executive branch consolidating authority into a one party state, and be upvoted immensely for it. Redditors somehow think corporations are involved in the spying, and hold many other simply wrong views. Another redditor popularily suggested that the government was purging military officials and was now going to attempt to discredit the legislative branch as an attempt to dissolve the Republic.

Now, I think this is a bit too much. There is no coup about the take place in the U.S.A. Justify these reactions to me.

This slide points out what corporations are involved in the spying. To me, it is worrisome that these supposedly "secret" programs are not only being disclosed to, but actively involving several corporations. These corporations effectively then have very "favored citizen" status in our democracy - they are directly working with the government on programs that the rest of us are not even allowed to know exist.

This is part of a pattern we've seen really since the cold war, where the government and the most powerful corporations increasingly seem to be working together. Originally this was largely limited to military contracts, but more recently we're seeing corporations with special access to other branches of government as well. Consider what happened with Megaupload - this occurred shortly after Democrat Chris Dodd was hired by the MPAA, and Kim Dotcom has alleged the obvious connection. This is hardly an isolated incident - I've posted here about another outrageous case of seemingly obvious political influence at the DOJ during the Clinton administration. During the Bush years, it was US-Microsoft, the case that suddenly ended after Microsoft got its lobbying act together, to say nothing of whole Halliburton deal.

I hate to use the term "shadow government" but between secret lobbying activities and secret programs like NSA spying, that's a real danger. What we have with the NSA are not just secret programs, but also secret courts, secret legal interpretations, and only the wealthiest corporations get to know about all of it. What more does it take before we have an actual shadow government?

As for the other stuff (purging officials, etc.) I'll concede that's unlikely. It's not a nefarious scheme by supervillians, it's more of a gradual compromise of our values and becoming more used to the idea that the powerful can have special access to the government.

I also have a particular issue with the use of private information security firms such as the one Snowden was working for directly before disclosing the information. Even if one is alright with our various and numerous 'spy' agencies doing these things, it's more concerning that there are private companies being contracted for these things. I recognize there is a vetting process that happens, but involving more organizations in this introduces more possibility for not just leaks but conflicts of interest and 'playing both sides of the field' to ensure continuing business in the future and maximized profits from the contracts.

It seems that your reasons for why others' reactions are overreactions is that they're concerned that the US govt is actually going down a certain path. I think this is not the sole reason nor even the main reason why people are concerned.

I think two of the main reasons are:
(1) People are concerned about their privacy.
(2) People are concerned that this opens the door for the possibility of the executive corruption conspiracy-type theories you've mentioned.

Re (2)- why is (2) a legit concern?
(a) The NSA systems give the government too much power. This kind of power would allow a corrupt government/executive to: monitor people who disagree; enforce censorship (see Associated Press' sources go dry after US govt seized phone records); neutralise people by knowing where they will be, what/who is important to them (threats), their secrets (blackmail); etc.

(b) There is also too much power given to individuals. People aren't all perfect (re following their agency's rules) and there could be abuse by individuals as well as the government.

So while I don't think I can comment on whether or not actual large scale executive corruption as you've mentioned is happening or not, I've instead addressed your original point, where you say it's an overreaction. I do not think it is.

I do not think your comment has described how it is not an overreaction. Indeed, there is a legitimate concern, but redditors and other people are acting like its the end of the world and extremely exaggerating the situation. Most of the comments regarding this seem very hype driven and, while there are certainly some real solid comments, lots of the upvoted comments regarding this issue are filled with logical holes or seem to be not their own opinion, just repeating someone else's. This issue certainly should deserve some reaction, but it seems that the reaction has been over the top. People are making these comments not because they honestly have thought of it individually, but because they want to win a popularity contest with votes or are more influenced by sensationalism of the situation. This is an issue with many events because of human nature, but what OP says is right regarding this situation and many others: the reaction received from this event is indeed an overreaction.

I suppose the overreactions are somewhat the nature of reddit, but in terms of this issue, I think an overreaction is needed because otherwise nothing will happen. But yeah, I definitely see certain people making ridiculous comments.

There is no coup about the take place in the U.S.A. Justify these reactions to me.

It is mildly coup-like that the executive branch, the NSA and the FBI have decided to creatively reinterpret (ignore) the laws that the legislative branch passed limiting the scope of their surveillance. Now I'm not saying that I think the executive branch is going to declare a dictatorship and dissolve the other branches of government, but when a branch of government ignores the limits placed on it by the other branches, that is a major blow to our system of democracy. It isn't a huge stretch to think that, if the threat was substantial enough, the executive might start ignoring legal/constitutional limits on detaining citizens suspected of terrorism.

But I have seen redditors predict that this is the first step into the executive branch consolidating authority into a one party state, and be upvoted immensely for it

I suspect it is a miniscule minority of redditors that have that view.

It is mildly coup-like that the executive branch, the NSA and the FBI have decided to creatively reinterpret (ignore) the laws that the legislative branch passed limiting the scope of their surveillance

This.

It's not a coup where some guy and his friends with guns declare themselves the new leader, it's a breach of the checks and balances system. If the executive branch can just do what they want the other two branches are out of luck

I'm am a classical/modern liberal in political philosophy, so as a liberal I hate what the NSA is doing.

Clarification- I thought that traditional liberalism was in favor of an expanded government with more power/control/interference. Can you explain how being a liberal makes you hate what the NSA is doing to me so that I understand?

Actually in the US, classical liberalism would be today's libertarian, wanting smaller government all around for more liberty. The modern liberal wants more civil liberties but economically more government involvement. Neither would want NSA spying though.

'swhy I haven't posted mine yet. I don't want to just set it out there and not argue/debate/clarify things with/for people. Seems like it would be a disservice to my own view as well as all of theirs, honestly.

Obviously these NSA revelations will lend themselves to a multitude of slipper slope and conspiratorial doomsday scenarios. But the fact of the matter is, this is really bad. Short term, this may not have an effect on your life, but as Snowden stated, the only thing stopping the US from becoming a police state is a change in policy. It may not be Obama, it may not be the next president, but as the surveillance industry grows, things will only get worse.

If you believe in the importance of a democratic state, with the bill of rights being the principle establishment of our basic freedoms, then you should not take the NSA revelations lightly at all.

If anything, the rest of the US population is not taking this seriously enough. It's really a news item that is losing steam. Most people I talk to are "over it", or they accuse Snowden of being stupid/traitor, etc. I work in government contracting, so maybe that is why. While the Reddit community seems very engaged, the average joe and jane of the USA are not taking these things seriously enough. It's scary.

I am still unconvinced that there is any justification of this being a prelude to an overhaul of the United States government.

That depends on how you define "prelude".

These changes in law and policy constitute a game-theoretical capacity for those in power to realize short-term gain at the expense of the public.

That does not mean that the sitting government intends that outcome, or that the sitting government lacks long-term perspective. What it does mean is that all it takes is one administration coming into power (if not this one then any administration following) possessed of short-term greed in order to abuse these unchecked powers. We will have zero recourse and they will enjoy nil accountability for their crimes.

Even if people are overreacting, I feel as if it's the only correct response. Underreact? It's good, keep doing it. Moderate reaction? Keep doing it, they'll forget in a week or two. Overreaction that leads to people whining about it for months on end? The most effective way to get your point across.

I saw a theory on reddit that PRISM is a data collection point to streamline the process of getting the material from internet companies organized after they have a FISA warrant. I still don't think the slides can conclusively prove whether this theory is true, or they are just collecting information without a FISA warrant. But either way, a lot of people think FISA warrants are a breach of privacy.

Redditors somehow think corporations are involved in the spying, and hold many other simply wrong views.

Considering that Snowden at the time was a private contractor right before the PRISM leaks corporates are by definition behind some of it. It gets even more sinister; foreign corporations from Israel have been implicated.

When Microsoft first entered participation with the NSA they had just gotten out of antitrust suit. Companies like Facebook and Apple owe the US government billions and the Obama administration was just caught using the IRS as a political weapon.